Au-delà de l'illusion

It might be the weakest of the latest "Magicians" movies (see Prestige and the Illusionist, the latter being overseen at the Box office), but it still has one strong central performance by Guy Pearce. I'm wondering when he will be in some top rated material again. Because the book does let him down a bit here.

He tries everything and he is pretty good in it, but does not have so much to play with, as Ed Norton, Hugh Jackman and Christian Bale. All are great actors and the others have the opportunity in their movies to shine. This being based on "true events" (some of them I guess, without having the complete background scoop on it), it does fall flat on it's back at times (no pun intended). Plus it might be a bit too much worried about the love story, than actually the story of our main character. At least that's how I felt ... still it can make a nice watch!

Another magician movie? But The Illusionist and The Prestige were great movies, so why not? Catherine Zeta Jones plays a foxy, yet poor, mother, scamming away through life pretending to be a psychic. When Guy Pearce's Houdini comes into town to prove or disprove the existence of the paranormal, they come into contact.

It is both a sad and a hopeful movie. A little too "psychic" for me and too little about the true nature of Harry Houdini except his fascination for his dead mother. The script itself does not lend itself to praise, but the atmosphere and realisation are top notch.

Bottom line: watch it when you are in a mood for a rom-drama, but you don't care much about the subject.

I really did not care that this was not a factual account of Houdini's life. There are some truths in the depiction of Harry (some actual B&W footage is used of his acts and his debunking of mystics). It was enjoyable, had beautiful cinematography, elements of humor a story of love and life...however implausible it may be, it does not detract from elegance of watching Catherine Zeta Jones(Mary McGarvie) try to support herself and her daughter, matching wits with the great Houdini.

Catherine displays a grace and style combined with fire and drive. Her daughter provides moments of comedic relief and there is tension between Catherine and Guy Pearce - should she win the money at any cost, allow herself to fall in love, what is in the afterlife? This was entertainment based on Houdini, a platform to tell a story which I thought was well done.

There's nothing death defying about Death Defying Acts. This is a pretty conventional motion picture that doesn't try to do anything new with the genre it's portraying. There's nothing terribly wrong about this, but there isn't anything particularly original about the movie either. While it's been pretty maligned in some circles - maybe this is why it never was released in the States and it arrived two years late in Peruvian theatres - it's not a bad movie; it's OK, I guess, but nothing spectacular. This is the hardest type of movie to review - the kind of film that didn't make an impression on me, but that isn't that bad either. This will definitely be a short review.

The film tells the story of mega-famous magician and trickster Harry Houdini (Guy Pearce - Memento). He's arrived on Britain as part of one of his tours - he's looking for a magician or psychic that can be able to guess - or "see" - the last words his mother uttered before dying. You see, this is all part of a scientific experiment he wishes to conduct. Something unexpected happens the moment he arrives at Scotland, though - he falls in love with psychic Mary McGarvie (Catherine Zeta-Jones), whose daughter and "apprentice", Benji (Saoirse Ronan) approached to accept his scientific challenge.

If that small plot summary sounded simplistic, that's because it is. The movie is not particularly ambitious, and that's maybe why I was left overwhelmed by it - there's so much to say about a figure as famous and recognizable as Houdini, and the film decides to focus on something decidedly dull. The film actually starts with some promise - I liked Ronan's voice-over, and it almost seemed as if the film was to focus on something interesting. But then, of course, I started to discover this was going to be a romance - a very clichéd, underdeveloped romance, at that - and I shuddered.

If there's a reason why the film is not bad, it's because of some solid performances. Guy Pearce is one of the most underrated actors working today - see his work in the aforementioned Memento if you don't believe me - and although the screenplay doesn't present a particularly three-dimensional version of Houdini, he makes him believable and humane. Catherine Zeta Jones is pretty good too, sporting a credible Scottish accent (!) and trying to portray Mary as a sympathetic figure despite the fact that the writers' don't seem to like the character. Timothy Spall - as Houdini's manager - is great as always, but the real standout is Saoirse Ronan. (Who was also really amazing in Atonement, by the way.) It's not only that she portrays the most developed, interesting and fun character, it's also that she brings it to life - Pearce and Zeta Jones' performances are precisely that (performances) but Ronan seems to be inhabiting her character, definitely putting a lot of passion into a project that arguably doesn't deserve that much.

Despite the fact that Death Defying Acts is already available on DVD and Blu-Ray in most countries, I got to see it in theatres. I can't say I regret having paid for this particularly theatrical viewing experience, but I won't enthusiastically recommend the movie either. The screenplay, while not terrible, is pretty ordinary, and the direction is all right. (Cinematography is gorgeous, though, and the score is beautiful.) Performances - especially Ronan's - are what save the film from entering the realm of mediocrity, but if you really want to watch a magician's flick, I'd recommend either the Illusionist or The Prestige.

i do not know why this film is flushed with negative reviews. First of all this is not a film about Houdini, there is no reason why this film should dramatically display the amazing acts and potentials of the artist himself; Secondly, i do not see why 'there is no reason for the creation of this movie' is justifiable, this film is just a testimony on how characters carry on with their lives and that itself is enough to make a film meaningful...in fact films like 'Atonement' (where the girl is also in) deserves this statement better where everything is just so FAKE. Third, i haven't watch the illusionist but i have to say this is richer in detail, and thus better than the Prestige--a film which displays too much magic 'action' but no depth to the characters or the plot at all, like an eggshell without the yoke inside...Lastly, this is a decent film where everything is well-made, well presented, well acting performances (exception of Catherine's dramatically 'fake' acting at times), and a good score